What does money, fame or leisure time have to do with basic freedom to sell your services to the highest bidder? You sound like a slave owner before the civil war, "what does the nigger have to complain about" his lot in life is much improved....Support who you want pot but I think supporting the owners and condemning the players is ass backward. oh and 5 hours a day??? There is no way you can maintain any skill with 5 hours a day. they may be on the ice for that but don't kid yourself, including training and all that goes into being a pro athelete it's a full time job and all jobs suck whether you enjoy it or not

I agree, while I don't feel bad for the players, I side with labor, not management, and for the players, while it is a game to us, it is their profession, and I have no problem with them defending and trying to get the best value out of what are for most guys short careers. And in terms of defending players v. owners, I don't really care whether a player makes 1 or 2 million in the abstract - clearly, there are bigger problems in the world - but I can say for sure that every player has worked his ass off to get a job in the nhl, a highly competitive meritocracy (one of the things I like about sports) but owners, please, I think of fat, lazy, I want to play in my blues band Jim Dolan who owns the Rangers, Knicks etc. Defending put more $$ in that silver spoon, never worked an honest day in his life, laughing stock in NYC mofo is some seriously weirded out "house slave" logic to be sure.

While I side with the players as a matter of principle of siding with labor over management, the only specific thing I hope comes out of the new CBA is that Bettman is not able to make player movement as inflexible as he has said he wants to do. He has said he wants a less flexible league, and he'll get some of what he wants, but hopefully it won't be so bad that it ruins the fans' experience (trades/ufas etc for their teams). We'll see what happens, after the loss of the entire 04-05 season I'm truly unmoved by the idea of lockout. I don't think we'll miss a whole year, so they can come back in December or Jan 1, fine, other than missing my fantasy league, I can wait it out. Losing 04-05 was a good lesson in living without hockey. Bettman is right that the fans will be back, I will, but in the interim, I say call me when it's over...I'll probably be out with friends, leave a message.

ukcanuck wrote:Support who you want pot but I think supporting the owners and condemning the players is ass backward.

Who "condemed" the players?

I said repeatedly that they have every right to get the best deal they can, as do the owners.

What I took issue with was you stating that they were somehow "hard done by" which is ridiculous. They will still be paid millions and have one of the best careers on the planet.

oh and 5 hours a day??? There is no way you can maintain any skill with 5 hours a day.

Yes there is.

You think they train more then a few hours a day in the off season?

A game day is typically a morning skate, food, nap, then 3 to 4 hours at the rink. Hell a lot of players no longer take the morning skate because they aren't fresh enough for the game. Pratice days are typically 60 to 90 min on ice, an hour or so in the gym, and some tape sessions. Off Days are off.

Players have LOADS of leisure time, why do you think you see a steady stream of visiting players at the Roxy? you think they could do that if they were training 10 hours a day 365 like the poster said.

Including training and all that goes into being a pro athelete it's a full time job and all jobs suck whether you enjoy it or not

No it isn't.

Even if you could convince me that it's full time during the season, the regular season ends early April and the preseason doesn't start until late September. That's 3 to 5 months where all the players have to do is stay in shape.

Anyway the point is moot, their actual effort isn't relevant anyway. They are paid millions because they are the best player in the world at a game that people flock to watch.

It doesn't matter if they work 1 hour a day or 20 hours a day, their earnings are not reflective of their hours worked or their working conditions, they are a product of the marketability of the skill set they posses. That is how this should be looked at.

Even if you have to work hard and risk your health to be an NHL player, neither thing has much to do with their compensation. You have to work hard and take risks to do a lot of jobs that pay 60k per year. It just isn't relevant when we are discussing jobs that pay on average 2.5 mill a year.

What is relevant is the fact that the players have every right to negotiate the best deal possible.

ukcanuck wrote:Support who you want pot but I think supporting the owners and condemning the players is ass backward.

Who "condemed" the players?

I said repeatedly that they have every right to get the best deal they can, as do the owners.

What I took issue with was you stating that they were somehow "hard done by" which is ridiculous. They will still be paid millions and have one of the best careers on the planet.

oh and 5 hours a day??? There is no way you can maintain any skill with 5 hours a day.

Yes there is.

You think they train more then a few hours a day in the off season?

A game day is typically a morning skate, food, nap, then 3 to 4 hours at the rink. Hell a lot of players no longer take the morning skate because they aren't fresh enough for the game. Pratice days are typically 60 to 90 min on ice, an hour or so in the gym, and some tape sessions. Off Days are off.

Players have LOADS of leisure time, why do you think you see a steady stream of visiting players at the Roxy? you think they could do that if they were training 10 hours a day 365 like the poster said.

Including training and all that goes into being a pro athelete it's a full time job and all jobs suck whether you enjoy it or not

No it isn't.

Even if you could convince me that it's full time during the season, the regular season ends early April and the preseason doesn't start until late September. That's 3 to 5 months where all the players have to do is stay in shape.

Anyway the point is moot, their actual effort isn't relevant anyway. They are paid millions because they are the best player in the world at a game that people flock to watch.

It doesn't matter if they work 1 hour a day or 20 hours a day, their earnings are not reflective of their hours worked or their working conditions, they are a product of the marketability of the skill set they posses. That is how this should be looked at.

Even if you have to work hard and risk your health to be an NHL player, neither thing has much to do with their compensation. You have to work hard and take risks to do a lot of jobs that pay 60k per year. It just isn't relevant when we are discussing jobs that pay on average 2.5 mill a year.

What is relevant is the fact that the players have every right to negotiate the best deal possible.

perhaps I am being a little over sensitive, it might be because i watched the republican convention and have been tracking the fortunes of the detestable BC Liberals (not so much for their politics, but their lying sack of shit "we're really liberals honest" they are the social credit/ conservative party and if they had any balls they would have come clean years ago)Anyway I still think its not so easy to perform at the level the pro's do and I bet an hour in a gym going side by side with any of them would kill the average dude. so I think its way too easy to underestimate what the players actually bring to the table. As for the owners making the best buck possible, all I am saying is find the solution that does not betray the principle of free market economics and I am on board. personally I think this transcends pro sports, I mean if capitalism in its ideal form doesn't work here in the New York Hockey League then why are we accepting it as a system to provide us all with the truly important things?

ukcanuck wrote:oh and 5 hours a day??? There is no way you can maintain any skill with 5 hours a day.

Sorry to pile on, but down-time (rest and recuperation) are important parts of training. The "leisure time" is required in order to build strength and endurance. High performance strength/endurance training regimens are typically 3-4 days out of 7 and while off days still involve a lot of stretching and some cardio (and probably a lot of massage), by no means does any of it involve working out for 10 hours a day straight.

You hear stories about how the actors for the movie 300 had these incredible boot camp training regimens - it's a little bit true, a little bit bs, and a lot of makeup. Those abs are painted on with makeup. And no, Kill Bill is not a realistic portrayal of how to train to be a badass. Even the US Marine Corps boot camp only does 70 out of at least 84 days in camp physically training, and many of those won't be whole day exercises (albeit, the official requirements for passing seem really weak to me; 3 pullups, 40 situps in 2 min, and 3 mi in 28 min? My information has got to be wrong.).

Over training is detrimental and 10 hours a day year round will make you look like a Roman era farm/labour slave and they'd be worthless (or dead) by the time they were in their 30's.

ukcanuck wrote:As for the owners making the best buck possible, all I am saying is find the solution that does not betray the principle of free market economics and I am on board. personally I think this transcends pro sports, I mean if capitalism in its ideal form doesn't work here in the New York Hockey League then why are we accepting it as a system to provide us all with the truly important things?

There are a Hell of a lot of wealthy million/billionaires in NA You'd think that finding owners in the NHL would be an easy thing, but as we all know it's extremely difficult. Right now Phx can't find an investror to pony up $20 million. The Onatrio Teachers Pension fund just divested it's self of the Leafs ( likely the best financial franchise in the NHL )

I'm sure we all have savings or pension plans of one sort or another ie we're all capatilists to one degree or another. In my own case I don't have a work/union sponsored plan so mine is a self managed plan. What ever the plan we all expect the plan to go on ad ifinitum and not to go belly up. They all depend on wise investing. I seriously doubt if ANY plan has an NHL team in it's portfolio ....to risky. When they tried to raise bonds in PHX it failed miserably. The NHL in particular is HIGH risk business. As a rule the higher the risk the more or better return you would expect. The risk factor IMO for the NHL is that high I'd think most would expect atleast a double digit + return.

Players on the other hand sign contracts that preclude loss of capital and though they may suffer physical trauma they're insured ( by an insurenace business ) up their ying yang for that eventuality.

Idon't mind players making a lot they're a limited supply and just like actors or surgeons etc should capilize from that. I don't see many walking away because they can do better else where in another profession. They train to the degree they do to ensure no one takes their place, that's just a sensible move.

Fred wrote:There are a Hell of a lot of wealthy million/billionaires in NA You'd think that finding owners in the NHL would be an easy thing, but as we all know it's extremely difficult. Right now Phx can't find an investror to pony up $20 million. The Onatrio Teachers Pension fund just divested it's self of the Leafs ( likely the best financial franchise in the NHL )

You have mentioned this before but I am not sure I agree with it, there always seems to be another rich guy willing to step up, whether thats pure stupidity on their part I am not sure about that either. In Phoenix Balsillie (sp) was willing to buy and was turned down by the very boys club I think is fucking things up for their own personal gain. As it turns out he was a flash in the pan financially, but he was there willing to buy even that abortion of a franchise. Clearly I am no expert but common sense says that the problem in Phoenix is more to do with all the undiscovered liability involved with the building, the tax payer, and the city of glendale, than whether its good investment as a sports franchise- who the hell knows what snake pit one is stepping into in that one.

As for the Toronto maple fags, the teachers sold pretty damn fast considering the coin involved and how much did they make on the deal? I bet they didn't lose money and in this economic environment, remember the international banking disaster, (rich mofo's again) it makes sense that a union fund like the Ontario teachers fund would put their money in a lower yield, safer investment. I mean thats little people's money, you wanna be the guy holding that guilt if the world economy goes go tits up ? even besides the point that its probably a little politically inappropriate for the teachers to be involved in such cavalier things as professional sports anyway..

I just think those are two bad examples if you are trying to say its so risky to own and run a pro hockey team that the players should not be able to exercise the same rights you and I take for granted. Basic things like the right to work for the company or organisation you choose, to live and work in the city of your choice. and the simple expectation that a contract is contract. I mean where in your life is a contract not a contract?

I know my cell phone carrier would like to argue that its signed in goddam blood and I am certain somewhere along the line the MSG entertainment has stock in verizon...I know for a fact I have seen Vodafone (my carrier) on football jerseys...

(Hey Per if your reading this, football is the shit when it comes to the model for running a pro sport.)

I'm sure we all have savings or pension plans of one sort or another ie we're all capatilists to one degree or another. In my own case I don't have a work/union sponsored plan so mine is a self managed plan. What ever the plan we all expect the plan to go on ad ifinitum and not to go belly up. They all depend on wise investing. I seriously doubt if ANY plan has an NHL team in it's portfolio ....to risky. When they tried to raise bonds in PHX it failed miserably. The NHL in particular is HIGH risk business. As a rule the higher the risk the more or better return you would expect. The risk factor IMO for the NHL is that high I'd think most would expect atleast a double digit + return.

I am not against making a buck, hell triple digits if they can get it, be my guest, however, the fact is that Bettman and his bosses took a nice little league with 20 odd stable franchises, loved by millions with a storied history and the greatest championship trophy in sports and tried to make it a global brand out of it, they sold franchises to suckers in places where the only ice comes in drinks and now when its obvious its not working like they thought, they want to change the rules to suit themselves without loosing the golden goose they had (for the second time!)...

Clearly there is no solution that keeps the southern franchises, and allows for free enterprise, in a free market the Rangers are going to kick the Coyotes ass in free agency and it will be dynasty city all over again (which I think Vancouver would compete just nicely thank you) Therefore, in order to keep buttmans wet dream, the only honest way is for the owners to accept the players as full partners. Balance the salary cap with full revenue sharing, spread the risk across the entire league and spread the wealth as it comes 50/50. Its a nice socialist solution and if the owners are so willing to toss their capitalist ideals in the fire anyway...

There sure is alot of talk about 'free market' and 'capitalism' for a league that has a large portion of its members on some level of welfare. Hilarious that a bunch of millionaire teams take handouts and subsidies, for all we know the billionaire teams do as well. Look at the deal Bettman conned out of the politicians in Glendale....and with that guarantee in place he has an "owner" who still doesn't have the capital to purchase the team let alone sustain the operational costs.

These labour disruptions are disgusting & insulting to the fan. With every lockout/strike I lose a little love for the NHL. I'm sure I'm not alone.

ClamRussel wrote:There sure is alot of talk about 'free market' and 'capitalism' for a league that has a large portion of its members on some level of welfare. Hilarious that a bunch of millionaire teams take handouts and subsidies, for all we know the billionaire teams do as well. Look at the deal Bettman conned out of the politicians in Glendale....and with that guarantee in place he has an "owner" who still doesn't have the capital to purchase the team let alone sustain the operational costs.

These labour disruptions are disgusting & insulting to the fan. With every lockout/strike I lose a little love for the NHL. I'm sure I'm not alone.

ClamRussel wrote:There sure is alot of talk about 'free market' and 'capitalism' for a league that has a large portion of its members on some level of welfare. Hilarious that a bunch of millionaire teams take handouts and subsidies, for all we know the billionaire teams do as well. Look at the deal Bettman conned out of the politicians in Glendale....and with that guarantee in place he has an "owner" who still doesn't have the capital to purchase the team let alone sustain the operational costs.

These labour disruptions are disgusting & insulting to the fan. With every lockout/strike I lose a little love for the NHL. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Think about the Glendale sweet heart deal and then ask yourself ....... how come investors are not being killed in the rush to buy the club then ?? The answer is of course although the deal seemed good, it belys the fact the club is hemoraging huge money.

And why is it if the return was so good why doesn't the NHLPA invest their pension fund into a team .... for instance PHX. I wouldn't invest a plugged nickel into an NHL team. The ones that are making money are not for sale and the others no one wants, and that constitutes probably more than 50%.

Most players after their first year in the league, certainly 2 season have enough wisely invested to serve them for the rest of their lives ...... and it's guarnteed, not bad

ClamRussel wrote:There sure is alot of talk about 'free market' and 'capitalism' for a league.

If that were the case, maybe 10 teams and 250 players.

Topper am I the only one who would prefer that? Toronto, New York, Montreal, Detroit, Boston, Chicago, Vancouver, Philly, Pitts and LA. Everybody else in the American League and use relegation to go with that shootout bullshit to keep the Euro's happy...

ClamRussel wrote:There sure is alot of talk about 'free market' and 'capitalism' for a league.

If that were the case, maybe 10 teams and 250 players.

Bingo.

I don't see much of a need to pick sides in the CBA debate, both parties have reasonable cause to get the best deal possible for their side.

If costs aren't controlled, then a 30 team league will be unsustainable.

The onus really is on the players to not let their share of revenues hinder the sustainability of a 30 team league.

However, there are a number of wealthy organizations who rake in money on an annual basis, and they also have a responsibility to share part of their revenue for the overall health of the league.

Obviously, both sides want the other to incur more of the cost of doing business, and right now they're bargaining to come up with a deal.

As long as the power game doesn't get out of hand, a deal should be made at some point over the next month.

why are you always the voice of reason except when it comes to that idiot on American radio who pretends to be a journalist...what's his name not steinberg... klein...something? chrissie everett sounds familiar for some reason

ukcanuck wrote:why are you always the voice of reason except when it comes to that idiot on American radio who pretends to be a journalist...what's his name not steinberg... klein...something? chrissie everett sounds familiar for some reason

ukcanuck wrote:why are you always the voice of reason except when it comes to that idiot on American radio who pretends to be a journalist...what's his name not steinberg... klein...something? chrissie everett sounds familiar for some reason

Oh man, I still stand by that 100%

War DP and Rome over Canadian, hack talk show hosts.

I'm starting to enjoy American politics over Canadian political figures, I'll go that far, but I'm still thinking a communications degree from U of C is closer to UCFV than Ryerson